Uploaded by mills mclaughlin

PTP401 PS Assignment

PTP401- Professional Studies- Learners and Learning
Caroll and Alexander (2016, p.14-5) converse how careful consideration and
attention to detail must play a part in the design of the classroom environment if
children are going to be stimulated and motivated to learn. For this essay I will be
focusing on the aspect of establishing a stimulating environment for pupils within
Standard 1 of the Teachers’ Standards (DfE, 2011). I will explore the ideas of
different theorists and how these translate to the classroom, particularly focusing on
the educational theories of Montessori and Piaget as well as the philosophies of the
Reggio Approach. Within this, I will also be reflecting on and referring to my school
placement, where I was primarily based in a Year 1 class. Year 1 could be viewed as
the transition class from early years to lower primary, therefore a lot of early years
methods remain to be seen in many Year 1 classrooms and set up of the classroom
environment is often similar. For example, on placement in Year 1, the children had
access to their own designated outdoor learning area that was often used at the
same time as the indoor classroom space, this setup of the classroom environment
is often seen in a Reception class.
Maria Montessori (1870-1952) is known for developing an approach to early
childhood education (Pound, 2006, p.29). Allen and Gordon (2011, p.41) present
Montessori as a scientist, using the classroom to observe children and, following
which, then find ways to encourage their development. Through these observations
O’Donnell (2014, p.36) identifies Montessori’s four approximate developmental
phases, the first plane was ‘infancy’ (0-6 years) when children possess an
unconscious absorbent mind, the second plane ‘childhood’ (6-12 years) children
have a conscious mind, the third plane ‘adolescence’ (12-18 years) when children
used abstract thinking and the fourth plane ‘adulthood’(18 years onwards).
Allen and Gordon (2011, p.41) summarise the approach of Montessori, in her aim to
develop the whole child, conclusively that children learn best by doing. Isaacs (2012,
p.1) identifies her aim to unfold the potential of each individual child, recognising
young children as active learners requiring choice and independence, where their
learning can be facilitated in a favourable environment to their development. Isaacs
(2012, p.18) comments Montessori was one of the first to advocate how important
the first six years the life of a child was, as they lay a firm foundation for the whole
child. Isaacs (2012, p.19) continues to discuss the belief had by Montessori that
during these formative years children establish conceptual frameworks based on
sensory experiences.
Isaacs (2012, p.99) comments that criticisms of the Montessori approach are due to
a lack of knowledge regarding the work of Montessori and the misuse of the
Montessori approach in practice. Chen (2016) notes that are can be implications
when the classroom is based on a ‘freedom’ learning environment as advocated by
Montessori. Others criticise how Montessori did not clinically document her findings
and observations (Helfrich, 2011, p.16).
Nehring Massie (2017) identifies the link made by Montessori between concentration
and human development, explaining how attention is the prerequisite for the
foundation for learning. Nehring Massie (2017) suggests there are many factors that
can influence a child’s attention including the learning environment. Mooney (2013,
p.49) discusses the way Montessori urged teachers to organise their classrooms to
create stimulating environments for the children and enable the children to manage
on their own. The classroom environments at my placement school had been
designed with this concept at the forefront of their plan. The school had consulted
their pupils and parents on where they considered they learn best. This resulted in
many tables and chairs being removed from the classrooms and a variation of
furniture brought in, ranging from a bed to a sofa or a tent in a reading corner, to the
wendy-house and a cupboard through to ‘Narnia’ in the library. Mooney (2013, p.38)
comments that beautiful, orderly, child-sized environments are a part of the legacy of
Montessori. The Year 1 classroom was highly decorative, it contained one childsized horseshoe shaped table and chairs to accommodate about five learners, a
lowered table where children and adults would sit on the floor to work at and a small
breakfast bar with four bar stools along the window. The children would be directed
by the teacher to position themselves to work where they thought that they would
work best, with whom they would work best. This unrestrictive approach appeared to
particularly engage Jack, who would not necessarily always choose the same
position either in the room or in the outside area but would always rise to the
challenge of working his best and to engross the task at hand.
Mooney (2013, p.38) discusses Montessori’s belief that children learn best through
sensory experiences and that teachers should ‘educate the senses’ in their
classroom environment. O’Donnell (2014, p.64) clarifies that Montessori alleged that
this promotes creativity. Mooney (2013, p. 39) further talks about the sounds the
children may hear, including whether music is played and if so, what music is played
and when. Music was often played in the classroom on placement but a time that
always stood out for me was handwriting practise. Handwriting practise would
usually occur after a break, the soothing music would be playing as the children lined
up ready to re-enter their classroom. The children knew that this music meant it was
time to work on their handwriting and they would quietly concentrate on the task at
hand, the hustle and bustle of the playground forgotten. The music helped provide a
calm yet stimulating environment for the children to engage with their work.
Mooney (2013, p.37) states the work of Montessori provided a foundation for the
work of later theorists, including Piaget. Jean Piaget (1896-1980), (described by
Pound (2016, p.36) as the Swiss expert dominating thought on the progression of
the thinking and learning of a child), saw children as the constructors of their own
knowledge, using people and objects in their environment to gather information and
thus create meaning (Aubrey and Riley, 2016, p.33). As reiterated by Starko (2018,
p.130) Piaget saw curiosity as an urge to explain the unexpected which led to new
understandings. Pound (2006, p.36) revels the attention given by Piaget in the
intellectual progression of the child and notes how Piaget suggests that the mind of a
child develops through a series of pre-determined stages through to adulthood.
Hayes (2010, p.46) reports how Piaget broadly defined these stages as the Sensorimotor stage (0-2 years), the Pre-operational stage (2-7 years), the Concrete
Operational stage (7-11 years) and the Formal Operational stage (11 years and
older). Johnston and Nahmad-Williams (2009, p.114) remark on the fact Piaget
believed that the development of each child happens in the same order, yet each
child will have varied experiences and hence, their cognition will vary.
Isaacs (2015, p.55) notes the work of Piaget has been criticised for not being
sufficiently scientific, not properly standardised or controlled. Following this, as
mentioned by Pound (2006, p.38) the results, from not only observations of his own
children but also from his experiments, are over-generalised from a narrow range of
children. Pound (2006, p.38) also highlights that the stages of development simply
offer a snapshot of development, further observations may have shown continuous
development rather than the shifts in thinking as Piaget proposed.
Mooney (2013, p.79-80) observes the thought of Piaget that it was the children’s
interaction with the environment that generated the learning, as children engage they
start to make sense of the people, activities and objects in their surrounding
environment and consequently begin to understand how things work. Mooney (2013,
p.77) also depicts how Piaget questioned how children arrive at what they know as
opposed to what children have learnt and when. Pound (2006, p.38) evaluates these
ideas and suggests ways Piaget’s theory can be put into practice including openended activities and questions, uninterrupted periods of exploration and with the
children having control over their learning. On placement, the Year 1 class would
often be given a choice of varying tasks to complete, with the option for the children
to gather any resources they require to complete their chosen activity. For instance,
the teacher might complete the input for the Maths lesson together with the whole
class but then allow the children to decide which task they would like to complete to
consolidate their learning, before coming back together as a class for a plenary, a
chance for questions and opportunity to share their learning. This could be seen to
be using the role of the teacher as the facilitator as considered by Selepe and Moll
(2016) who debate Piaget’s theory of teaching as facilitation. This approach
appeared to work well for James and Laura who would often choose to position
themselves to work together yet would normally decide upon different tasks and
would therefore end up sharing different learning experiences. We can reflect upon
this using Lindon and Brodie (2016, p.40) who observe Piaget’s insistence that
children are active learners and adults should construct environments in which
children are able to discover for themselves.
Within Year 1 the children would be at the Pre-operational stage, the earliest stage
of cognition, which is characterised by response to stimuli and the development of
early ideas because of experiences (Johnston and Nahmad-Williams, 2009, p.27).
Mooney (2013, p.79) also explores Piaget’s idea that children will learn more through
experience. Mooney uses the example of learning how things grow, if children are
given the opportunity and the environment in which they can grow a plant, the
experience will teach them more than a teacher sitting the children at tables to read
them a book on how things grow. Whilst on placement in Science the children were
learning about materials and their different properties. The children were presented
with a problem to solve, Winnie the Witch’s roof had broken, and the children needed
to investigate what would be the best materials to use for a roof. Once all the
children had seen and felt the different materials and asked questions about their
properties, such as if the material were flexible and/or waterproof, they carried out
their own roof experiment using a gingerbread man in a jam jar. The children were
happy with the material if it were able to hold as a roof and withstand their different
weather conditions whilst the gingerbread man remained safe and dry. Conducting
the experiment themselves helped the children correct any misconceptions they had
beforehand, identifiable by their predictions, as well as enabling the children to draw
upon their own ideas of fair testing and drawing their own conclusions.
The ideas of both Montessori and Piaget, particularly thinking and language as
suggested by Thornton and Brunton (2010, p.9), have influenced the Reggio
Approach, from Reggio Emilia in Italy. Loris Malaguzzi (1920-1994) was the key
person responsible and dedicated his life to developing the Reggio Approach,
alongside which the approach was also established by the cultural influences from
Reggio Emilia (Thornton and Brunton, 2010, p.9). Nutbrown (2006, p.120) identifies
that one of the central theories for the Reggio Approach is the importance of the
environment in facilitating children’s learning. Carroll and Alexander (2016, p.16)
reiterate the importance of providing a variety of learning opportunities within a
classroom that encourages curiosity and thinking. Nutbrown (2006, p.119-21)
describes the Reggio Approach as a form of learning experience and notes how the
Reggio Approach is based on respect for childhood and the development of
communities of learners.
Abbott and Nutbrown (2001, quoted in Nutbrown, 2006, p.121) found that there were
issues surrounding the role of adults (including the role of listening), inclusion, the
role of play, the views of parents and their expectations, special educational needs,
the architecture in the settings, and dealing with children’s responses to difficult
issues. Nutbrown (2006, p.121) comments on the after effects of the approach and
how well children may transition from learning in a Reggio Approach style in to more
formal styled schooling. Nutbrown (2006, p.121) raises the fact that others ask
simply whether the approach is truly transferable to different areas and if so, would it
really work effectively. Biroli et al (2017) investigated the differences between the
Reggio Approach and other alternatives, Biroli et al suggest that the Reggio
Approach did not prove to show signs of positive effects with no significant
differences between the outcomes.
Wurm (2005, p.16) discusses the importance of ‘wait time’ in the Reggio Approach,
providing the children with the chance to arrive at their own thoughts and
understandings is seen as critical. From my experience, in the classroom on
placement ‘wait time’ was highly valued. The teacher was often seen to promote
‘wait time’ within the class, allowing the children to come up with their own ideas,
thoughts or simply the answer and truly engage with the task- helping to stimulate
the children’s learning. Children would be given time to think for themselves, often
before chatting and sharing with a talk partner before all coming together as a class
collectively with the teacher. Mollie, a child in the class who may often stammer
when talking, also benefited from this ‘wait time’ in a different way. When speaking
and giving her own view, after being provided with a period to think, Mollie’s speech
improved dramatically. Following this, the confidence had by Mollie may begin to
increase, possibly leading to a greater level of participation and a higher level of
engagement in class.
Children should be independent, reflective learners, critical thinkers and problem
solvers (Berger, 2013, quoted in Krechevsky et al, 2013, p.i). As similarly
encouraged by Montessori, the Reggio Approach sponsors children as independent
learners. Thornton and Brunton (2010, p.20) state how children should be making
their own choices and trying things out, they should be encouraged to be
independent. Carroll and Alexander (2016, p.18) explain that resources should be
clearly labelled and accessible, necessary and supportive, to assist and promote
learning. Carroll and Alexander (2016, p.18) mention how pupils should know that
resources are to be respected and shared but above all that they can access them
independently. Pitcher (2014) highlights that resources should be suited to the age
and level of education of the children in the classroom, meaning they should support
and stimulate learning not hinder. On placement resources in the classroom (such as
number lines, rulers, word banks, erasers) were readily available for the children to
access and use independently without the need of asking an adult for help. The use
of accessible resources seemed to be particularly stimulating for the children during
Maths, where the children could each decide independently what resources they
required and even whether they needed resources for the tasks. For instance, Oscar
would often evaluate the different problems in a task and, following which, would use
varying techniques and resources to solve and complete the activities.
In summary there are many factors to be considered when creating a stimulating
classroom environment, and it is not just the immediate physical environment which
plays a part. Many aspects of the educational theories of Montessori, Piaget and the
Reggio Approach were evident within the Year 1 class and it is clear from these
theories and approaches to learning that both the environment and experiences are
crucial to stimulating learning. As noted earlier, Carroll and Alexander (2016, p.16)
talk about the provision of opportunities within the classroom environment to
stimulate learning and how the layout of the classroom can promote and support
this. Not only did the Year 1 classroom on placement, but the whole school,
thoroughly endorsed this idea. To conclude as suggested in each of the educational
theories deliberated, children are competent and should be encouraged to be
independent and curious, which in turn, will stimulate their learning.
Word count: 2620
TurnItIn Paper ID: